Ismail Mohamed Saleh, Bahdi Firas, Mercado Michael Oliver, Habazi Randa, Alexander Angel, Prabhu Sahana, John Sharon, Kovvali Chandra, Othman Mohamed O
Division of Gastroenterology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Department of Internal medicine, Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.
Endosc Int Open. 2020 Oct;8(10):E1273-E1279. doi: 10.1055/a-1226-6372. Epub 2020 Sep 22.
Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with the double-balloon endoluminal intervention platform (DEIP) is a novel technique for removal of complex colon polyps (> 2 cm) or those located in anatomically difficult positions. DEIP helps create a therapeutic zone with improved visualization and stability, facilitating polyp removal. We aimed to compare the outcomes of DEIP with the conventional cap-assisted ESD (standard ESD) technique for colon polyp resection, in particular, the ability to complete the ESD procedure without resorting to hybrid ESD or piecemeal resection. This was a retrospective cohort of all patients who underwent colon ESD in a single large tertiary referral center between September 2016 and October 2019. Information was collected on patient demographics and study outcomes including procedure time, rates of en bloc and curative resection, operative and postoperative complications. All patients were followed up for 1 month after the procedure. 111 patients were included in the study (DEIP 60, standard ESD 51). There was no statistically significant difference between mean procedures time (± SD) in the two groups, mean (81.9 ± 35.4 min standard vs. 96.4 ± 42.2 min in DEIP). Mean polyp size (± SD) was similar between the two groups (7.6 ± 6.0 cm vs. 6.2 ± 5.5 cm , = .2). There were no significant differences in en bloc and curative resection rates or operative and postoperative complications between the two techniques. Procedure time was similar using both techniques. However, DEIP enabled the entire procedure to be performed using the ESD technique without resorting to snare resection, which may affect the en bloc and curative resection rate. There were no significant differences in en bloc and curative resection rates between the two groups, probably due to the small sample size.
使用双气囊腔内介入平台(DEIP)进行内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)是一种用于切除复杂结肠息肉(>2 cm)或位于解剖学困难位置的息肉的新技术。DEIP有助于创建一个可视化和稳定性更好的治疗区域,便于息肉切除。我们旨在比较DEIP与传统帽辅助ESD(标准ESD)技术在结肠息肉切除方面的效果,特别是在不采用混合ESD或分片切除的情况下完成ESD手术的能力。 这是一项对2016年9月至2019年10月期间在单个大型三级转诊中心接受结肠ESD的所有患者的回顾性队列研究。收集了患者的人口统计学信息和研究结果,包括手术时间、整块切除率和根治性切除率、手术和术后并发症。所有患者在术后随访1个月。 111名患者纳入研究(DEIP组60例,标准ESD组51例)。两组的平均手术时间(±标准差)无统计学显著差异,标准组平均(81.9±35.4分钟),DEIP组平均(96.4±42.2分钟)。两组的平均息肉大小(±标准差)相似(7.6±6.0 cm vs. 6.2±5.5 cm,P = 0.2)。两种技术在整块切除率、根治性切除率或手术及术后并发症方面无显著差异。 两种技术的手术时间相似。然而,DEIP能够在不采用圈套器切除的情况下使用ESD技术完成整个手术,而圈套器切除可能会影响整块切除率和根治性切除率。两组在整块切除率和根治性切除率方面无显著差异,可能是由于样本量较小。